Belarusian Smolensk Region

"Letters" by Felicjan Suryn as a Source on the History of Belarus in the Second Half of the 19th Century

• admin • 8 min read • Актуаліі

“Letters” by Felicjan Suryn as a Source on the History of Belarus in the Second Half of the 19th Century

S. P. Astankovich (Krychau)

Felicjan Suryn remains a rather little-known figure for contemporary researchers. Only recently, thanks to Polish historians, has it been possible to establish his exact biography [5, p. 25-26].

For domestic scholars, it is very important that Suryn is mentioned in his letters to M. Drahomanov by one of the founders of the Belarusian idea, Vajnislau Savich-Zablotski: “Mr. Khvelka Suryn and others, and the Polish Petersburg newspaper ‘Kraj’ has more than once written like Mr. Yelski, and it seems that they consider themselves more Belarusians than Poles” [1, p. 316]. Incidentally, it was Suryn who published a substantial article “Belarus” in the “Slownik geograficzny krolewstwa polskiego i innych krajow slowianskich” [4, pp. 193-194].

Felicjan Suryn was born in the Mstislavl region in 1842 or 1843; he spent his childhood and youth at the estate of his uncle Bashary (Chavusy district). He graduated from the Mogilev gymnasium and enrolled at the Gory-Goretsky Agricultural Institute. In 1863, he was among those students who joined the unit of Ludwik Zvyazdouski. Wounded, Suryn was left by the insurgents at the Institute hospital and appeared before an investigative commission which, however, determined that he had not taken part in the uprising. The student, however, came under police surveillance and was expelled from the institute. After this, he lived in the Krychau region until the early 1880s.

He began his literary-publicistic activity during the period before the uprising of 1863-1864 and left a rich legacy in many fields [2, pp. 119-127; 6, pp. 140-141]. For contemporary historians, the materials from his travels across Belarus in the 1870s can yield much interesting material.

These journeys did not take place all at once and were more like free excursions to the most varied locations. Therefore, the author did not give his descriptions of impressions a finished, polished form.

In total, four “Letters from Belarus” (1872-1873) and five “Letters from a Journey through the Land” were written, the first of which is dated 1873, the last — 1878. All of them were published in the popular Warsaw positivist journal “Tygodnik illustrowany.”

It should be noted that for Suryn, Belarus had two meanings — a broader one (Mogilev and Vitebsk provinces, the eastern part of Minsk province, half of Smolensk province, and part of Chernihiv province) and a narrower one (Mogilev province and the eastern part of Vitebsk province). The remaining part of the land is called “Lithuania,” and it is noted that Western Minsk and Grodno regions once constituted “Black Ruthenia” [4, pp. 193-194]. Podlasie is singled out as a separate region.

During his travels, Suryn visited dozens of various places, leaving their picturesque descriptions. Here, for example, is Minsk: “the city itself is old, dirty, with narrow streets, buildings tall and gloomy, yet has several rich edifices” [8, p. 229].

Vilnius evoked more emotions: “a word of magnetic power for so many hearts that have forever linked their name with the name of this city, the cradle of our romanticism, alma mater of Adam…” [12, p. 379]. Grodno, Vitebsk, Polotsk, Bialystok, and others are also described in detail.

The traveler notes with regret that “social life practically does not exist in Vilnius. It has ceased to be the hearth of intellectual life of the province, although before recent times it boasted so many figures of first importance in literature. Balinski, Malinowski, Chodsko, Odyniec, Syrokomla, Eustach Tyszkiewicz, and many others lived or frequently visited Vilnius. Today there are almost no people here who write. Also the book trade, so lively recently, has now quieted down” [12, p. 379].

The multinational character of Belarus at that time was not overlooked in these travels: “Minsk, perhaps even more than Mogilev, is a Jewish city; in the hands of Jews are the most profitable crafts and all trade. Christians populate the outskirts of the city, engaging in agriculture and the most ungrateful crafts. There is also a handful of Tatars who, as everywhere, are engaged in tanning” [8, p. 229].

Suryn makes various observations concerning the linguistic situation in different parts of the land: “thus today in the localities I visited in the Ashmyany region, among the common people there prevails a language very different from the one spoken in our vicinity of Mogilev; it has entire Polish layers (cale okresy polskie) and many individual Lithuanian expressions. This sub-language (narzecze) of Ashmyany villages represents a transition from the Belarusian language to Polish. Also the Polish that prevails in estates and cities is everywhere well understood in the local villages” [11, p. 61].

Describing the Ashmyany region, F. Suryn notes that the environs of Zhuprana, Baruny, Kreva, and Halshany once belonged to the Balts, and were later colonized by Slavs. In connection with this, the Lithuanian language was gradually displaced by the language of the Ruthenians.

At the same time, it should be noted that his characterization of the Belarusian language does not greatly differ from the rather widespread assessments of contemporaries: “This is also the language of the Slavic-Krivichs, which still lives on the lips of the people, so long used in courts, the language in which the first Statute was compiled, and in which Meletius Smotrytsky wrote his polemical work; it bears no traces of any refinement and it is entirely unknown for it to have been the organ and reflection of the thought of educated people. Most of all it lacks abstract concepts, names for elegant, refined things, and as Smotrytsky, so too the compilers of the statutes conveyed all these names and concepts with Polish expressions and entire phrases” [9, p. 243].

The author pays certain attention to various economic issues of the land’s life: “the quality of soil in the Ihumen district is as low as in the Barysau district. But the cultivation is more careful than our Belarusian one, because the Lithuanian plough is a more practical implement, it performs deeper plowing” [8, p. 229]. In the Cherykau district, the state of the economy: “…is worth weeping over, both in large and small estates. The lack of capital and the miring in routine hinders improvements, the three-field system reigns supremely and we owe it for the fact that estate incomes have fallen almost to zero. Today we are saved by selling forests, but this too, organized in the old way, will not save us for long. It is not worth speaking of factory industry; we must import everything… And what can we offer in return?.. timber and hemp” [7, p. 154].

During his travels, Suryn encountered a multitude of people and made special note of some meetings. For example: “Today, leaving the cathedral with a resident of Grodno, we met Mrs. Orzeszkowa. I was just under the impression of her new story ‘Eli Makower,’ so the meeting with the authoress was for me a most meaningful event” [10, p. 34].

From the “Letters,” it is evident that their author was quite well-versed in the literature on Belarusian topics, having read the essay by Vosip Turchinovich, as well as the works of A. Rypinski, Ya. Barshcheuski, V. Dunin-Martsinkevich, and others [4, pp. 193-194].

Thus, Suryn describes the various aspects of life in the Belarusian land of that time in sufficient detail and interest.

At the same time, it should be noted that at times one must approach the author’s reports critically, as the assessments are of a very personal nature. Moreover, it is evident that in some matters self-censorship was at work — the author could not openly write, for example, about the causes of the decline of intellectual life in Vilnius after 1863.

Thus, the “Letters from a Journey through the Land” by Felicjan Suryn constitute a rather interesting historical source that helps the contemporary researcher see Belarus of the 1870s through the eyes of a Catholic nobleman and is important for studying the worldview of this segment of Belarusian society at that time.

List of Sources and References

  1. Belaruskaya litaratura XIX st.: khrestamatiya. Vucheb. dapamozh. dlya studentau fil. spets. VNU. Mn., 1988.
  2. Litvinovich A. Felitsyan Suryn yak dasledchyk tradytsyynay kultury i bytu belarusau // Kniga, bibliytechnaya sprava i bibliyagrafiya Belarusi. Mn., 1993.
  3. Litvinovich A. Suryn Felitsyan // Entsyklapedyya gistoryi Belarusi. U 6 t. T. 6. Kn. 2. Mn., 2003.
  4. F. S. [Suryn Felicjan]. Bialoruś // Slownik geograficzny krolewstwa polskiego i innych krajow slowianskich. W 15 t. T. I. Warszawa, 1880.
  5. Kukuc D. Suryn Felicjan // Polski slownik biograficzny. Tom XLVI / 1. Zeszyt 188. W-wa — Krakow, 2009.
  6. Olechnowicz M. Polscy badacze folkloru i jezyka bialoruskiego w XIX w. Lodz, 1986.
  7. Suryn F. Listy z Bialorusi. List II. Powiat czerykowski // Tygodnik illustrowany, 1872. T. X, Seria 2, No. 248.
  8. Suryn F. Listy z podrozy po kraju. List I // Tygodnik illustrowany. 1873. T. 12. Seria 2. No. 306.
  9. Suryn F. Listy z podrozy po kraju. List II. Bialoruś naddźwińska. — Inflanty // Tygodnik illustrowany, 1874. T. 13, Seria 2, No. 329.
  10. Suryn F. Listy z podrozy po kraju. List IV. Grodno — Bialystok. Tygodnik illustrowany, 1877. T. IV, Seria 3, No. 82.
  11. Suryn F. Listy z podrozy po kraju. List V. Żuprany — Boruny — Krewo i Holszany // Tygodnik illustrowany, 1878. T. V, Seria 3, No. 135.
  12. Suryn Felicjan. Listy z podrozy po kraju. List III // Tygodnik illustrowany. 1876. T. 2. Seria 3. No. 50.